we're going to be previewing the next debate on month with some terrific guests. i hope you have a great night, beautiful weekend, and we'll see you back here on monday. ♪ appening going toward. and everyone have a great weekend. [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> good evening i'm michael shure sitting in for eliot spitzer, and this is sup. vice president joe biden and made paul ryan clash early. martha raddatz moderating and keeping a tight grip on the proceedings, the topics included this sharp exchange on social security and medicare. >> social security and medicare going bankrupt. if you reform these programs for

my generation, 55 and below. >> who do you believe him or me, a plan that added $6,400 a year more and with regard to social security we will not privatize it. >> shocking to know that both sides claimed victory after the debate. democrats praised biden on the substance of his arguments while republicans attacked him on style points. >> biden new to pick up that flag and go in. did he it tonight and effectively. >> i don't think from a stylistic point of view that he did himself any good. >> he looked like an arrogant cheshire cat smiling and laughing every time ryan spoke. >> joe biden is joe biden. he's authentic and real. he's state forward and he says what he thinks and he says what

he means. >> mitch mcconnell criticizing style. more from mitt romney and former president bill clinton. >> the president watched the debate and thought the vice president did an excellent job presenting this administration's case. >> there was one person on stage last night who was thoughtful and respectful, steady, and poised. the other candidate, of course, just attacked. >> i kind felt for congressman ryan. he had to defend romney position that $716 billion in medicare savings in the president's budget that the congressmen voted for is some how a ripoff even though it was in his budget too. >> man he is good. for more on this debate and the

struggle of the future of social security and medicare. let's go to errol lewis and thomas frank. gentlemen, thank you for being with us on "viewpoint" tonight. i came away from that debate thinking that the vice president really did the job he needed to do. he stopped the bleeding from last week. some people say he started the bleeding of paul ryan and mitt romney but i think his job in the debate is to end last week for the obama-biden campaign. first i want to ask you, do you think he was able to accomplish that. >> i think he did. he certainly did that last night. he changed the narrative. whether or not the administration was back on its heels, afraid or unable to engage unable to loosen up and take it to the other side, we saw that and more. interestingly enough we have a retroactive answer to why the president last week may be seemed a little stiff, maybe

didn't seem so jovial. didn't loosen up and try to engage mitt romney. as we saw last night it can be jarring. not everybody liked it. >> that's something i want to ask you thomas frank this style, are we reading too much into it or did it matter a lot last night. >> it's a vice presidential debate, so by definition it did not matter a whole lot. i tell you, i had two really different reactions to it. i read the debate before i came to the studio. i read the transcription of the debate and i agreed with joe biden on almost every point. but as i was watching it last night he really annoyed me, constantly laughing at the other guy and smirking and interrupting. and i thought about this a lot. it's very strange. i agreed with what he was doing yet i really disliked the way that he did it. i think that might be just the

midwesterner in me. i'm from kansas, originally, and i don't think you should--that he should have dragged the debate down to that kind of level. it was very fox news sort of thing to do. >> in so doing listen, joe biden was a senator for 6 years years--for 36 years. vice president for almost four years. he must be doing something right. >> agreed, absolutely. what i would say is--and i think he probably rehearsed it and thought about it, and they did it because they had this split camera thing where it's showing both people at the same time. if he had done it two or three times in the entire course of the hour and a half debate, it would have been very effective. to do it constantly, that really--that seemed really-- >> you know, thomas, i think it really might be a regional thing. you mention it might be the

kansasen in you. in new york, politicians are expected to have swagger. when i saw is last night was the happy warrior which was applied to al smith who fought for the working class out of new york in the 1920s. that's just what you do. you kind of smile as you slice in between the guy's ribs. >> why is it last week romney comes out aggressive, warrior-liker and is praised for it. and then biden comes out as the happy warrior and is criticized and is too aggressive. >> that's true. if you try to appear presidential and dignified, they say what is the matter with you. as you try to beat the other guy's brains in, they say, what is the matter with you. what i would say in joe biden's defense and i would challenge anyone within the sound of my

voice to send me a note, who was voted out of office because they were too arrogant or too condescending. i don't know that person. >> wait a minute. people don't like--people don't like condescension. but that's not what i think was going on here. you know what bothered me, and had he done this move once or twice, you know, it can be very effective. to do it constantly like that, it bothers me in two ways. first of all this is not a good way to win over voters who are on the defense. second of all imagine it turns all sorts of people off not just me. there are some midwestern states that are not entirely red you know. think about it this way. think about the president. what if we as a nation decided yeah that is the way our presidential debates should be conducted. these guys, you constantly talk over one another ridicule one

another. >> there is that, thomas, but then there is the idea of the soft peddling, the happy warrior. when they got into the substance of the debate, i want to you listen to what joe biden said when he was talking about stimulus and engaging ryan and calling him out on things that were not true. this is joe biden talking about stimulus. >> i love my friend here. i'm not allowed to show letters but go on the website he shared me two letters and said, by the way can you send me stimulus money for a companies here in the state of wisconsin. >> that was awesome. that was a good moment. >> that was a classic moment. >> look, like i say, when you read the thing or when you think about the actual points being made, i'm biased in this regard, i'm very liberal you know? i think ryan is trying to pull a fast one in all sorts of ways. but can we go back to ryan here? one of the really serious things about this guy is that he is

very sincere in what he's doing. he really believes this stuff. he's not trying to--it sounds to you and me like he's trying to pull a fast one but i think honestly believes in what he's saying. there is this kind of misfiring of what biden was doing. biden was clearly i think aiming for partisan liberals, partisan democrats, often people like me who are disappointed with obama and are not really involved in the race, and trying to express our feeling of bewilderment of angry of romney and ryan for proposing these outrageous things. that's what he's trying to do. ryan himself doesn't think of it that way. ryan, as you could see last night, either he is really really in earnest which i think he is, or he's a really good actor. >> i think he wasn't quite prepared.

he was prepared for the debate, but when joe biden is in your face like that, it's hard to prepare. you saw him drinking water like 13 times. >> i was wondering where all that water was going. i was worried about that. >> you know where he went right after the debate. i want you guys to stay with me. we'll talk about this debate a little longer. errol lewis and thomas frank stick with me. we have the specifics about the romney-ryan tax plan or the lack of specifics. this is "viewpoint." i'm michael shure. you're watching current tv. now to my point. (vo) jennifer granholm ... >>for every discouraged voter, there are ten angry ones taking action. trickle down does not work. in romney's world, cars get the elevator and the workers get the shaft. that is a whole bunch of bunk. the powerful may steal an

election, but they can't steal democracy.

>> eliot: when romney selected paul ryan as a running mate, he was supposed to get a real numbers guy. as creator of the path to posterity ryan was supposed to provide the numeric justification for the tax plan. instead we got this. >> do you have the specifics. >> look at what mitt romney--look at what ronald reagan and tip o'neill did. >> michael: i mean, as my friend cenk uygur would say, of course! the reagan defense. they've relyied on drawing a comparison to ronald reagan as well as one other president. >> it's been done before. >> it's never been done before. >> jack kennedy lowered tax--

>> now you're jack kennedy. >> if jack kennedy only knew how much he would come up in vice presidential debates i think paul ryan knew where that was going. i'm joined by erol lewis and thomas frank, thank you for sticking around and talking to us. you know, in looking back at this it really taxes the way that they come up in these debates. the thing they're not talking about are mitt romney's taxes. the idea that they can look back and talk about taxes and ryan still getting caught with these lies and then the next day saying that's exactly what we meant to say. how does this work, errol. >> a promise has been made. a big broad promise has been made to splash taxes. it's estimated by a reasonable objective source that this could cost treasury 5 trillion-dollar over ten years.

a lot of people are naturally curious. where are you going to get that 5 trillion-dollar, and it's not in this ticket's political best interest to answer this question. let's say they can do this. the mortgage deduction is going to have to go. there are a number of important tax loopholes, if you want to call them that, or tax incentives that will have to be ended. this is not something they're prepared to talk about. politically you have to understand that. they have 27 days left. it's not in anybody's best interest to say we're going to hawk at the most important entitlement that they've had for generations. they're trying to do something that is politically understandable, and the democrats will try to hold them to account and fill in those gap where is they have refused to be specific about it. >> michael: thomas, what errol is saying is really true. i can't imagine a homeowner who wants to see that mortgage

interest write-off gone. when it's clear that the republicans cannot do this cut without that you heard ryan last night. how do they get away with that? >> i think in the same way they're getting away with all sorts of things. if you look at the paul ryan budget, and i understand that's not what mitt romney is proposing this year, but if you go back and look at--he did put paul ryan on the ticket. he did it for a reason. you look at the social security privatation schemes that they have proposed over the years these are things that would seriously damage the life chances of lots and lots and lots of people in this country. one of the reasons why they're able to get away with it is because i think people have a lot of cognitive disdense about this you look at the two political parties out there, and we atomb they're wholesome products like coke and pepsi.

they're not going to deliberately do something that is going to wreck the lives of millions and millions and millions of people. but you know, they are! this is the thing. and it's hard for people to understand that such a product would be allowed in the political marketplace but it is. it's very easy for them to skate around it because no one believes it's possible. >> michael: to push your analogy a little bit they're presenting themselves as diet coke and diet pepsi that can harm you. errol, i want you to answer a little bit of what thomas just said. this whole idea of representing something that isn't because people will just believe it or they won't believe it because they think these people are good. how can they make that differentiation in the next debate. did romney get what he wanted last night when he named paul ryan to his ticket. >> i think he did. here's what really needs to be

pushed on this debate, when the answer comes back over and over again we'll do what tip o'neill and what ronald reagan did we'll do what they did in 1986. we'll get together with our ideological opponents we'll meet, be reasonable and figure out 5 trillion-dollar worth of stuff. that sounds nice, and people want to believe that that's what their lawmakers and elected leaders are goinged to. what the president's team has to do is, you know, bring up some of the instances as you can go as far as birtherrism, and talk about what a poisoned atmosphere there is inside the beltway some of the statements that have come out mitch mcconnell saying the number one priority is to defeat the president. >> michael: right. >> and go on and on. look, you may think that both sides are going to get together to figure out 5 trillion-dollar of stuff so you don't need the specifics now but the reality is that won't happen. >> michael: and you have to make

the changes to the finance reform. >> yeah, i would actually--it's even worse than that. because if you look at the various historical tax cuts that paul ryan referred to, they were done in vastly different circumstances. i'm surprised he didn't bring up in the warren g harding tax cut you know. the motive for cutting taxes is very different from what it was when john f. kennedy was president, the early 60s. today it's to defund the state conservatives say that all the time. they have two motives. one to let their wealthy constituents keep that much more money. but the other one is to defund the liberal state. they've talked about it for decades. they're wrecking the state. they're wrecking the government. they're not trying to make it run better.

>> michael: all in a week when we heard the government had trunk under the obama--shrunk under the obama administration. i'm going to ask each of you the same question. who won the debate and will it matter. >> i think joe biden clearly won the debate. you can gauge that by the other side complaining by the style issues and not going to the substance. i think it will be merged in the polling data with whatever happens on tuesday in the presidential. but i think they've started a theme. if the president kind of continues in biden's direction it will merge together, and you'll start to see polling data to support that it was a very good debate for the democrats. >> michael: thomas frank. >> i would say biden won on issue but ryan won on decorum. one thing that biden did that i really liked when he would start on those grand rhetorical

flights about the wonders of liberalism and the middle class he tend to wander off but those were inspiring. if barack obama could talk that way, they would have this thing in the bag. >> michael: indeed, they would. i think a lot of people were watching it that way. guys, he had a great time. errol louis and thomas frank. thank you for your time. >> what a malarky. there was a lot of talk about malarky, and what do you do when your co-host (vo) during the debates, it's hard to know what candidates are thinking. unless, of course you've stood at the podium yourself. with governors granholm, spitzer, and vice president gore, watch the only truly experienced presidential debate coverage.

>> michael: as you can see pundits are still arguing about who won last night's vice presidential debate. but one side of how the public received it is what people googled as they watched the debate. that brings us to the number of the day--three. the third highest debate research term last night was malarky. that c characterized the whole evening. it became this week's big board. an old slang word of possibly greek or irish origin meaning deceptive talk or nonsense, and paul ryan, shall we say was full of it. joe biden said malarky the first time when ryan mentioned defense cuts and mentioned that ryan's budget cuts embassy security $300 million. and then when saying obama opposed sanctions when obama administration tightened

sanctions. and sometimes [ voice of dennis ] ...safe driving bonus check? every six months without an accident, allstate sends a check. ok. [ voice of dennis ] silence. are you in good hands? [ crowd cheers ] [ male announcer ] clay matthews is turning the nfl upside-down. turn your world upside down with gillette fusion proglide because you can shave against the grain with comfort. only proglide has gillette's thinnest blades for less tug and pull, so you can shave against the grain comfortably. fusion proglide, our most comfortable shave or twice your money back. ♪ ♪ gillette the best a man can

get.

parr >> michael: eliot may be out tonight but we're still going to talk wall street reform. first lawrence o'donnell with different difficulties, and a science lesson from congressman paul broun. when it doesn't fit anywhere else we put it in the view finder. >> don't say you weren't warned this would happen. we don't have it. we were going to show you i guess you can figure outs the etch-a-sketch tape of the romney guy saying we're going to etch-a-sketch thing. but the control rom room, it doesn't always happen. >> the woman fainted on the air and her co-host kept talking

like nothing happened. >> are you okay? >> what this does is give us an opportunity. >> one person was unconscious while the other person kept talking like the last year's debate. >> everything is coming up romney. the latest polls have romney neck and neck with obama. >> which polls are the pundits' favorite? >> before the debate the majority were leaning toward pew and gallup, but look what happened last week, a massive swing. >> in7-eleven cull polls obama is up 20 points. >> the poll is polling well among pundits who no longer give a. [ bleep ] >> i call my was bias on 7-eleven.

they have a margin plus and minus of mormons who cannot drink coffee. >> while "the new york times" cbs is now gaining traction relative to the daily host upp automated robo poll. [ ♪ music ♪ ] >> all this stuff i that is taught about evolution the big bang theory, all of that is straight from the pit of hell. >> how old do you think this rock is? >> i'm more interested in the rock of ages than the age of rock. >> there is scientific data that i found out that actually show that this is really a young earth.

i don't believe that earth is but about 9,000 years old. >> i do not think about things like things i do not think about. >> participating--well, let's see what have we got here. we have teleprompter stuff that makes no sense since we didn't run that other thing, so we'll junk it all. >> michael: we won't junk it all. paul broun the congressman from georgia, people are going to go on november 6th, they'll go in a ballot box and vote for him. unbelievable who we'll vote for sometimes. i said it. mitt romney misleads the public on wall street reform. i said that, too. you know who else said that? maxine (vo) what is said here could decide the election. current tv presents coverage of the presidential debate. with unrivaled analysis and commentary. >> was this the game changer? is this going to change the dynamic? (vo) the only network with real-time reaction straight from

the campaigns and from viewers like you. >>now that's politically direct.

>> michael: well, street reform is practically a nightly topic here at "viewpoint," whether eliot is calling attention to reckless behavior by the big banks or calling out timothy geithner. our next guest, a senior member on the house of financial services committee describes mitt romney's debate talk on god frank as incoherent and dishonest. joining me now congresswoman maxine waters, democrat of california, and co-finders the processsive the congressional progressive caucus and the member of the house financial services committee.

all of our attention will turn to the debate for a chance for barack obama to at least resuscitate his reputation as an engageed politician that took a hit last week. how can the president do incorporate a little bit of what biden had last night but still be himself in a debate, especially when it comes to lies on finance. >> you know, there has been a lot of speculation about why the president was perhaps a little bit laid back or a little bit disengaged. and the base, you know, the supporters, they want the kind of confrontation or the kind of approach that biden took last night not only knowing the issues knowing the facts and challenging ryan. this is the kind of debate we would like to see. we have so much--we know so much about who they are what they are not what they have done, what they have not done, and so

that information should be put right out there right to force them to deal with some of the misleading statements that they have made, some of the outright lies that have been told, and some of the misinformation. that's what biden did and we like that. i think the base expects that. we think the president will do that. we cannot answer all of the questions about why he was a little bit laid back. he has the information. he's very smart. he's extremely articulate. he can do this, and that's what we're looking for. >> i keep wondering what the reasons are for. that's a conversation that has been had and it doesn't really add anything. but what i'm intrigued by you said "the base" twice in that answer. is it time to forget the swing voter, the independent voter if that person actually exists, and go after the debate, or is that

too big of a political could you calculation for this president. >> i think it is extremely important first of all to pay attention to your porters--for your supporters. the reason why you have them is you've demonstrated that you're close to them in terms of their concerns about the issues. you share the same kind of philosophy. you have done things in the past that led them to believe that they can count on you. so i do believe that it is important to take care of the base first and foremost. of course, we're all concerned about swing voters and independent voters, but i think what they're looking for is they're looking for truth. they're looking for honesty. they're looking to see the kind of debate that will lead them to believe they can depend on the candidate, they can trust the candidate. so i think if you really show up

for the person that you are and barack obama really, really in the past has shown what he cares about. and what he has fought for. long before he even came to the united states senate. some of those issues that he was involved in, and i think it serves him well to go ahead and speak to them to articulate them to stand up for them. >> michael: you know one of the things-- >> could you speak up louder. >> michael: one of the things that congresswoman the people were talking about that really they weren't talking about last night that struck me was how proud joe biden seemed to be about the accomplishments of the administration. that didn't show up with the president last week. a lot of things didn't show up with the president last week. is there a balance he can have by talking about the accomplishments of his administration without boring us, and then turning around and saying this is what you're saying isn't true. there has to be a point where he calls romneys out on his lies.

and is it time to start talking about bain? two debates have gone by and bain capital has not come up once. is that the president's job? >> well, bain capital is a very important issue because i think that's one of the issues that defines romney more than anything else. what has he been involved in? what was bain capital? did he actually go and close down these companies and extract the assets, and did he ship jobs offshore? i think people need to know that. it seems to me that it is certainly worthwhile debating. american people like to believe that their leadership, and certainly the president of the united states respect american companies, respect the workers in these companies, and who are looking out for the best outcomes for workers who get up every day and go to work and

work hard. they want them to have a decent wage. they want them to have pensions. they want them to have benefits. this is what romney is not about. this is a man whose company bought companies in china where they paid people $0.24 an hour. this is a company who shipped jobs off shores. what adds insult to injuries, while americans are working hard and dealing with our financial institution, he actually took his money offshore and put them in banks to avoid paying taxes? if that's something that the american people should know about, then i don't know what is is. >> michael: well, congresswoman waters you should write that down and fax it to your president. i appreciate your time, congressman maxine waters from

california always a pleasure to talk to you. >> thank you. >> michael: issues that women care about it affects half of the chill of peppermint. the rich dark chocolate. york peppermint pattie get the sensation. [ ryan ] it doesn't get any better than endless shrimp at red lobster. you can mix and match all day! [ male announcer ] don't miss red lobster's endless shrimp just $14.99! try as much as you like, any way you like! like parmesan crusted shrimp. hurry in, offer ends soon! i'm ryan isabell and i see food differently.

>> michael: women's issues and climate change. not exactly the "hot" topics of the debates. perhaps they should be. that's ahead. and later tonight in "the war room," jennifer granholm will break down the debate with presidential historian and debate expert alan schroeder and then turn towards libya with the middle east e peter lawrence korb of the center for american progress. that's atttttttttttttttttttttttttttt (vo) during the debates, it's hard to know what candidates are thinking. unless, of course you've stood at the podium yourself. with governors granholm, spitzer, and vice president gore, watch the only truly experienced presidential debate coverage.